Originally Posted by DArtagnan
That's a misunderstanding.
I'm talking about being a leader among established sites.
It has nothing to do with who's leading the site - and it has nothing to do with staying away from doing reviews.
I'm saying that it's fully possible to write quality reviews and to do quality news work - without striving for leadership among RPG sites.
In fact, I think it's completely senseless to try and determine which is a "leading site" and which is not. It depends on the audience and what it's looking for.
I don't think of people or communities as "the best" or "the worst" - I think of them as either contributing or not contributing.
I don't feel capable of measuring the objective value of any site.
For instance - I consider The Codex to be just as potentially valuable as RPGWatch. It depends on who you are - and what you're looking for.
I also consider sites like IGN or other mainstream sites potentially valuable - depending on the audience. Casual gamers will get more from IGN than they'll get from Codex or the Watch.
So, I don't use my own personal opinion or preference as some kind of objective measuring stick.